WhatsApp vs Telegram - Features and security

[sajunky]

actually if you read i said end to end encryption, check Telegram say they use Server-client encryption for normal chats and groups only end to end is used for secret chats.
If you knew the difference between the 2 you would know which is more secure and where one of them can be more easily intercepted.

End to end encryption. Do you really know what it means?
It means that Whatsapp/Facebook cannot read your end-to-end encrypted messages, including photos, etc. Various reports show that Facebook can dig into your messages.

Did you hear that even a tenager can clone your Whatsapp account and the attacker can read all your past messages stored on your phone? This is an example that even the most powerful encrypion fails when implementation is damn poor and stupid.

And finally how do you think Whatsapp would use end to end encryption for groups? I am looking forward for your implementation proposal. .LOL.

So, I will not respond further in this matter. You believe what Whatsapp say to you, I don't. They were caught many times on lying. Whatsapp protocol is keept secret, so in a typical scenario you can't verify what they say. Telegram is an open source project for a client, so you can verify what they say and a server code is promised to follow the same.

With Telegram, it is all what I want. Flexibility of server based encrypted messaging with a fast and reliable delivery and 99.99999999999999% security when using secret chats.

 

[silkenphoenixx]

In 2017 we managed to get at least 100 people onto Telegram. Enjoy the privacy more. Facebook gfys.

Did you miss my link above showing that Telegram is linked the Russian equivalent of Facebook? No chance of Kremlin / KGB ties at all.

End to end encryption. Do you really know what it means?
It means that Whatsapp/Facebook cannot read your end-to-end encrypted messages, including photos, etc. Various reports show that Facebook can dig into your messages.

Yes, this is exactly what it means. Facebook can dig into your metadata - just like the post office can technically keep track of who you send letters to and who sends them to you. It's hard to keep that info from them because they have to deliver the letters. But Facebook / WhatsApp can't read the contents of your messages.

Did you hear that even a tenager can clone your Whatsapp account and the attacker can read all your past messages stored on your phone? This is an example that even the most powerful encrypion fails when implementation is damn poor and stupid.

Yes, this is technically true - it's a Sim Swap issue though, and it would be difficult for WhatsApp to implement anything stronger without becoming inconvenient.

In contrast to Telegram which uses a cryptography that they brewed themselves and no-one has verified. We don't even know for sure that they don't have access to your private keys, not that it matters anyway because they can decrypt them. That's what the client-server kind of encryption that you love so much allows them to do.

And finally how do you think Whatsapp would use end to end encryption for groups? I am looking forward for your implementation proposal. .LOL.

A simple web-search revealed how it's done:
https://security.stackexchange.com/...protocol-work-and-what-security-properties-do

So, I will not respond further in this matter. You believe what Whatsapp say to you, I don't. They were caught many times on lying. Whatsapp protocol is keept secret, so in a typical scenario you can't verify what they say. Telegram is an open source project for a client, so you can verify what they say and a server code is promised to follow the same.

With Telegram, it is all what I want. Flexibility of server based encrypted messaging with a fast and reliable delivery and 99.99999999999999% security when using secret chats.

1. WhatsApp's protocol is not secret. It's the Signal protocol, developed by OpenWhisperSystems and verified by experts.
2. Part of Telegram's implementation is open-source, they have an API which they provide which to be fair is more than what WhatsApp does. But their server-side software is completely closed. And because they don't use end-to-end for most chats, you can't be sure that they're not showing your each text message to Putin before they send it on to your friend. Probably they don't, but you don't know.
3. All it took was another simple websearch to discover why WhatsApp's protocols are more secure than Telegram's:
https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/31418/signal-vs-telegram-in-terms-of-protocols
Granted that this is excepting social-engineering attacks, to which Telegram would be just as susceptible as WhatsApp.

You are allowed to prefer Telegram to WhatsApp or vice versa, no one will judge you for that. Telegram has some nice advantages, e.g. not having to know someone's number in order to message them. I'm really neither here nor there about the possibility of huge groups, I personally don't like group chats at all I find them annoying. But different strokes for different folks. Honestly, I don't really care about the security aspect of either. I was fine with SMS which is completely plain-text.

But please don't come and try to convince people that a piece of mouldy Gouda is actually Gorgonzola, because it's just not.

 

[isie]

End to end encryption. Do you really know what it means?
It means that Whatsapp/Facebook cannot read your end-to-end encrypted messages, including photos, etc. Various reports show that Facebook can dig into your messages.

Did you hear that even a tenager can clone your Whatsapp account and the attacker can read all your past messages stored on your phone? This is an example that even the most powerful encrypion fails when implementation is damn poor and stupid.

And finally how do you think Whatsapp would use end to end encryption for groups? I am looking forward for your implementation proposal. .LOL.

So, I will not respond further in this matter. You believe what Whatsapp say to you, I don't. They were caught many times on lying. Whatsapp protocol is keept secret, so in a typical scenario you can't verify what they say. Telegram is an open source project for a client, so you can verify what they say and a server code is promised to follow the same.

With Telegram, it is all what I want. Flexibility of server based encrypted messaging with a fast and reliable delivery and 99.99999999999999% security when using secret chats.

please tell me how a teenager hacked whatsapp without you sim card - unless they sim swapped which itself is a SP issue not only a whatsapp one, but to get access to your past they would need your google or icloud account password but please post proof?

do you know what its is? end to end in the simplest terms means its encrypted from your phone and even if it pases through a server , anyone who has access to that server without the encryption key cannot see the mesaage.

do you know the architecture telegram uses - in the crux of the matter is telegram can intercept your chats and even though they encrypt its only encrypted from the server and not from the sender, the possibility is there they can read it.


i'm still waiting for you to put evidence in the claims you made about whatsapp etc.

I may be a fan of Whatsapp and I still consider the features of Telegram far superior but don't kid yourself their encryption in regular chats is not secure as the claim to be

as for whatsapp security in groups I dont need to implement it, its already there


and again genius i'm still waiting for your claims to be verified about the advertise p2p...you said that but cant back it up

and i get 100% security on ll chats i don't need to use some special secret chat which is cool , and the ability to have chats disappear is awesome - but again something i have to choose if want end to end encryption

One major problem Telegram has is that it doesn’t encrypt chats by default, something the FBI has advocated for. “There are many Telegram users who think they are communicating in an encrypted way, when they’re not because they don’t realize that they have to turn on an additional setting,” Christopher Soghoian, Principal Technologist and Senior Policy Analyst at the American Civil Liberties Union, told Gizmodo. “Telegram has delivered everything that the government wants. Would I prefer that they used a method of encryption that followed industry best practices like WhatsApp and Signal? Certainly. But, if its not turned on by default, it doesn’t matter.”

There’s no reason to not encrypt your messages by default, especially as an application that brands itself one that makes security a high priority. Contrary to the opinions of almost every encryption and security expert, Telegram’s FAQ touts itself as more secure as WhatsApp. But in reality, WhatsApp uses the most highly praised encryption protocol on the market and encrypts every text message and call by default.

as some one else's mentioned I trust Zuckerberg more then i trust these Russian brothers.

 

[Ricard]

Metadata, not data. They can't see the contents of your messages, but they can see who you're messaging and how frequently.

This complaint about WhatsApp being linked to Facebook is really amazing to me, because the donkeys that hee-haw about Telegram haven't looked past their noses. They don't realise that Telegram was founded by this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Durov
whose other big thing is VKontakte, which is basically the Russian version of Facebook.

Personally? I trust Zuckerberg *slightly* more than I trust Durov. Granted that's not much.

who is is more trustworthy? .. the Russians who dont care what happens in the West, or Facebook/Whatsapp who are all within mass surveillance countries (Five Eyes) and will put you on a 'No-Fly' list if you even mention something they don't like.

I don't use either systems, but the end result is "If you're not paying for the product, then you are the product"

 

[Ockie]

To the people that keeps talking about Telegram being Russian and the KGB gonna get ya. Telegram was developed by a Russian yes and indeed this person was responsible for the Russian "Facebook". Telegram was developed by him as a way for the Russian people to have a secure way of communicating without the government being able to keep tabs on them or their conversation. Telegram is not even registered in Russia I believe. It is registered in Germany and it's development takes place there.

That is why Telegram is so popular in Iran. People trust it as a why for them to communicate freely without their repressive government being able to prosecute them. Iran has numerous times requested access to Telegram to keep tabs on their citizens...and everytime Telegram has refused.

 

[isie]

To the people that keeps talking about Telegram being Russian and the KGB gonna get ya. Telegram was developed by a Russian yes and indeed this person was responsible for the Russian "Facebook". Telegram was developed by him as a way for the Russian people to have a secure way of communicating without the government being able to keep tabs on them or their conversation. Telegram is not even registered in Russia I believe. It is registered in Germany and it's development takes place there.

That is why Telegram is so popular in Iran. People trust it as a why for them to communicate freely without their repressive government being able to prosecute them. Iran has numerous times requested access to Telegram to keep tabs on their citizens...and everytime Telegram has refused.

Actualy they have moved from country to country and they currently in Dubai
and no one said anything about the KGB just they seem shady

 

[sajunky]

I decided return to your first post, as in the face of your later joyful creativity (which I decided to not reply) your derogatory comments on Russian and donkeys deserve due attention.

This complaint about WhatsApp being linked to Facebook is really amazing to me, because the donkeys that hee-haw about Telegram haven't looked past their noses. They don't realise that Telegram was founded by this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Durov
whose other big thing is VKontakte, which is basically the Russian version of Facebook.

For Russian Pavel Durov is a legend, like Mark Shuttleworth is a legend for South African. He had been opposing totalitarian regime which didn't change much after abandoning a communism. VKontakte is far more important for Russian than Facebook on the West. Similar idea is behind Telegram.

Personally? I trust Zuckerberg *slightly* more than I trust Durov. Granted that's not much.

I do trust some Russian individuals, as I know Slavonic people. They are passionate and straightforward, much different to the English/Germanic characters. When they smile, they do it from their hearts, when they dislike you they will not hide it behind a smile.

If Durov were about spying on you, he would not create secret chats with open source code client. You can verify everything from the soure code that Durov is not spying on you, as servers do not see your secret chats messages.

As for Zuckerberg, he is a Jew, you forgot to mention it. You made derogatory comment about Russian and donkeys who trust Russian, I can do the same about Jews. I can trust Jews only for one things, that Jews will do everything for money, nothing else is important, just money. He says it is end to end encryption but he intercepts 'metadata'. If it is really end to end encryption, then 'metadata' would be also encrypted. Like a VPN connecton, which truly encrypted end to end. You can only see two things: entry point and exit point. For me it is clearly not end to end encryption. One lie is found, so there is more.

 

[isie]

As for Zuckerberg, he is a Jew, you forgot to mention it. You made derogatory comment about Russian and donkeys who trust Russian, I can do the same about Jews. I can trust Jews only for one things, that Jews will do everything for money, nothing else is important, just money. He says it is end to end encryption but he intercepts 'metadata'. If it is really end to end encryption, then 'metadata' would be also encrypted. Like a VPN connecton, which truly encrypted end to end. You can only see two things: entry point and exit point. For me it is clearly not end to end encryption. One lie is found, so there is more.

Oy Vey that escalated

 

[RedViking]

Seems like you people will be better off with carrier pigeons.... Damn, I just really hope the pigeons are not American or Russian.

 

[RedViking]

/snip

 

[isie]

I decided return to your first post, as in the face of your later joyful creativity (which I decided to not reply) your derogatory comments on Russian and donkeys deserve due attention.

For Russian Pavel Durov is a legend, like Mark Shuttleworth is a legend for South African. He had been opposing totalitarian regime which didn't change much after abandoning a communism. VKontakte is far more important for Russian than Facebook on the West. Similar idea is behind Telegram.

I do trust some Russian individuals, as I know Slavonic people. They are passionate and straightforward, much different to the English/Germanic characters. When they smile, they do it from their hearts, when they dislike you they will not hide it behind a smile.

If Durov were about spying on you, he would not create secret chats with open source code client. You can verify everything from the soure code that Durov is not spying on you, as servers do not see your secret chats messages.

As for Zuckerberg, he is a Jew, you forgot to mention it. You made derogatory comment about Russian and donkeys who trust Russian, I can do the same about Jews. I can trust Jews only for one things, that Jews will do everything for money, nothing else is important, just money. He says it is end to end encryption but he intercepts 'metadata'. If it is really end to end encryption, then 'metadata' would be also encrypted. Like a VPN connecton, which truly encrypted end to end. You can only see two things: entry point and exit point. For me it is clearly not end to end encryption. One lie is found, so there is more.

OH BTW they encrypt Metadata as well
YOur flawed theory comes from the TOC tht do state "WhatsApp may retain date and time stamp information associated with successfully delivered messages and the mobile phone numbers involved in the messages, as well as any other information which WhatsApp is legally compelled to collect."
But if you look at their Protocol specification (the white paper freely availabe) it mentions mentions that the service "Encrypts metadata to hide it from unauthorized network observers" and that "No information about the connecting user’s identity is revealed."


P.s you sure you want to stick with that statement regarding his religion?
I get he was brought up Jewish - was atheist for a time - said some good stuff about Buddhism - met with the pope - I think he is trying to cover all his basis really

 

[sajunky]

But if you look at their Protocol specification (the white paper freely availabe) it mentions mentions that the service "Encrypts metadata to hide it from unauthorized network observers" and that "No information about the connecting user’s identity is revealed."

End to end encryption? You do always claim it is end to end encryption.

 

[isie]

End to end encryption? You do always claim it is end to end encryption.

And it is end to end (including metadata) - you claim its not yet cannot provide any ounce of proof.
In the same vain i have proven Telegram end to end only works on secret chats - while regular chats they don't.
You mentioned group chats in whatsapp are not encrypted and again i have proven you wrong.

You have yet to disprove any of my points with anything but your opinion - not once have you provided any investigation by anyone but your own asumptions which again i showed you how to test.

 

[MickeyD]

Mod note: Please take your religious debate to the PD sub-forum.

 

[isie]

Mod note: Please take your religious debate to the PD sub-forum.

Hey - I did say it was Off topic

 

[MickeyD]

Hey - I did say it was Off topic

Both WA and TG now have the delete for all feature.... so does this forum.

 

[isie]

any way Im just going to leave this here:

Hangouts: Messages sent over Google’s popular messaging and video chat service could be handed over if requested by law enforcement. The “off-the-record” feature only deletes messages from your history, but they may still be on the company’s servers, according to previous reports.

Messenger: Facebook’s messaging service does not offer end-to-end encryption by default, but its smartphone app does have a “secret” option, which sends messages with end-to-end encryption. Those messages do not show up in your inbox on Facebook.com.

Telegram: Telegram also offers end-to-end encryption in a feature called “secret chats,” but that setting has to be turned on. It is not by default.

iMessage: If you use iMessage to send text messages to someone with an Android device, those messages are not encrypted — they’re simply texts. The end-to-end encryption only works between iMessage users. Also, if you use iCloud to back up your information, iMessages are included by default. You need to toggle off those messages in settings so they aren’t stored on Apple servers.

Signal: The security of Signal has been praised by Edward Snowden and other security experts for its trustworthiness. Its code is open source, so it can be examined by independent researchers for security holes. Signal also allows users to verify their identities, which helps ensure that you’re only communicating with the intended recipient. The app has seen a surge in popularity since Donald Trump became president.

WhatsApp: All messages sent over WhatsApp are sent with end-to-end encryption by default, even voice and video calls. If you want to be extra careful, WhatsApp also has a feature for users to verify their identities. WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption was actually built in collaboration with the team that created Signal.

Confide: All messages sent over Confide are end-to-end encrypted, according to the company’s website. They also disappear after they’re read.

Text messages (SMS): Regular text messages are not encrypted, and are often recalled through a court order to help dispute legal matters.

Source


Soo get Signal they the most trustworthy

 

[sajunky]

And it is end to end (including metadata) - you claim its not yet cannot provide any ounce of proof.

Onus to prove is on you or Whatsapp, as I don't trust them. They are lying scumbags, so unless they publish client source code to prove (as Telegram does), there is no discussion.

As for Telegram, all messages are encrypted, including normal chats. Secret chats have end to end encryption and client source code is provided for verification.

 

[sajunky]

Soo get Signal they the most trustworthy

It could be, not sure. Problem I see is that Signal source code is covering encryption method and communication procedure. The actual client source code is not published. As usual devil is in details.

 

[sajunky]

Both WA and TG now have the delete for all feature.... so does this forum.

TG had it long time. WA claim to have it now, but my WA client is not doing it...

BTW, there is a claim in the post #20913362 that Zuckerberg (meaning "a hill of sugar") is not a Jew. I tried to object it as a false statement, but posts had been deleted.